.

'Revenge Porn' Now Illegal in California

Publishing nude photos with the "intent to cause serious emotional distress" violates a "revenge porn" law signed Tuesday by Governor Jerry Brown and may result in up to six months in jail and/or $1,000 fine.

Photo credit: Getty Images
Photo credit: Getty Images
Governor Jerry Brown signed a bill Tuesday to outlaw publishing so-called revenge porn online in California.

Senate Bill 255 (SB 255) makes posting graphic or naked images taken at one time with a mutual understanding they will remain private but later sharing said images online "with the intent to cause serious emotional distress" an invasion of privacy and illegal act equivalent to disorderly conduct.

The law was made effective immediately after Brown signed the bill Tuesday.
Violating the law is considered an invasion of privacy and being found guilty can mean up to six months in jail and/or a $1,000 fine.

The bill was sponsored by State Senator Anthony Cannella.

"Revenge porn often begins when relationships end," a statement released by Cannella's office Tuesday said. "But what were once private photos taken with consent can later be shared with others, and then posted online at multiple sites without the subject’s knowledge or consent. Some websites even specialize in posting such materials, and charge the subjects unreasonable fees to take down the illicit photos."

Civil liberties advocates like American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) oppose the bill's overly vague attempt to restrict online activity, according to the Sacramento Bee.

What do you think of the new law? Share in comments.
Gilbert R Albright Jr October 03, 2013 at 11:49 AM
And what is there to stop the women from LYING about giving saying it was OK to post the photos? At the time the photos are taken these women have a carefree attitude and have no problem with them being posted on the internet. Then a couple years later they get married and have kids and don't want the photos online or in public. They then call the cops and LIE claiming then never agreed to having the photos made public. It's the same thing with Domestic Violence claims. The Cops ALWAYS BELIEVE THE WOMAN! So now you have men being jailed and fined for making public photos years later that the women never objected to being made public AT THE TIME the photos were taken, because the women LIE and claim they never agreed to it.
debi October 03, 2013 at 11:53 AM
Hooray! The internet has become a theater for bullies and blackmailers. I hope this law will put a kabosh on the selfish men and women who don't care who they hurt in effort to publicize themselves.
Shevon Keeton October 03, 2013 at 01:13 PM
Why does it cover only if the guy is looking to "cause serious emotional distress." It should also cover if the guy sells them. They don't always post these pictures trying cause cause emotional distress. A lot of sites pay these guys for the pictures. Which then makes them above this new law. They just wanted the cash. So how do you then prove the guys intent. You can't. Also why does it not cover videos as well. Sex tapes or the like. Again if the guy posts that he's in the clear. This is a good start, but far from what needs to be covered. It should cover pictures, and videos. And for any reason. But much more than that these sites that have the them should be forced to take them down once you can prove it's you in them. No paying to have this taken down, no DMCA notices should have to be filled out, but a request of the person should be enough to make them take them down every time. There is tons of posts all over the internet that these sites refuse take down notices, get your DMCA notices then blackmail you with it, or try to get new pictures or videos from these girls to take down the old ones. They are the ones who need to comply with a law. They have all this stuff and no IDs on record, no consent forms, nothing. Yet no one goes after them. Just wrong.
ray October 03, 2013 at 02:02 PM
Gee, I'm so glad CA has it's priorities straight and only worries about the important things.
keith golay October 03, 2013 at 02:09 PM
dont get naked in the first place slut
robin October 03, 2013 at 03:09 PM
Why is it just women? Men get their pics taken too.
robin October 03, 2013 at 03:10 PM
Yet the gov won't pass a bill to have food labels state GMO's and such.
Mike Wanta October 03, 2013 at 03:30 PM
I'll wager that Moonbeam has overstepped his authority. Higher courts will rule on this
Bree_Zee October 03, 2013 at 03:54 PM
this isn't a law that will survive. it'll come down to she said/he said and it's about ownership of the photos. maybe we should educate our children not to take naked pics at any time, with anyone. idiocy is preventable.
exoticdoc2 October 03, 2013 at 04:17 PM
You know, if you didn't record it in the first place it wouldn't be around later to be used against you. This law is to protect the stupid.
Jake Mooney October 03, 2013 at 04:31 PM
If the ACLU opposes it, it must be a good law, even if Gov. Brown supports it.
Allan A. Cabrera October 03, 2013 at 04:38 PM
Ok So, if the girls don't want their sh*t hanging around the internet, the adult responsible thing to do is...Gee lemme think real quick...oh yeah...DON'T TAKE NUDE PHOTOS YOU DAMN MORONS!
Anton October 03, 2013 at 04:52 PM
And it's so easy now a days, I still have pictures of many old girl friends, in those days you had to use a 35 mm camera, wait for the flash to charge up and then a huge flash of light lit up half the room. Most of these women knew I was taking a picture, they are posing in the pic. The few I got of girls taking a shower or a bath you had to wait until they were washing their hair and their eyes were closed. Now a days you can take a picture with little effort and they would never even know you took a picture. Kids today,LOL. It's nice to look back now that I in my mid 40s, my wife knows about these pictures, she don't care, it was in the past.
Patrick Perotti October 03, 2013 at 05:32 PM
First, let's not fault the people who participated in taking the pics. We all make stupid mistakes, and should be allowed to fix them if it doesn't hurt anyone else. Second, the answer to all this seems very easy. A photo/video of persons in the nude or engaging is sex cannot be posted online unless the poster has written consent of each participant; and, if any participant later withdraws their consent in writing, the item must be taken down.
Frank October 03, 2013 at 05:58 PM
Another stupid law...drugs are illegal, bank robbery is illegal...lots of things are illegal...so now we are making another thing illegal because it hurts the feelings of stupid people who allow these pictures to be taken. We are letting violent criminals out of jail because of overcrowding and now we are making this illegal. If you are stupid enough to allow someone to take the pictures...too freakin bad, you should have thought about that before.
Lxix Isee October 03, 2013 at 06:14 PM
Just taking all the fun out of it.
Sammy October 03, 2013 at 06:25 PM
"later sharing said images online "with the intent to cause serious emotional distress" So, just who gets to decide if it was with that intent? If the person who posed for the pictures had a problem with it, they should have had sense enough to not pose for them in the first place.
Ssan Henry October 03, 2013 at 06:58 PM
So this is what gov't needs to work on
Common Sense October 03, 2013 at 08:17 PM
Give us a break, Gilbert. This is a pretty easy situation to KNOW if he's guilty or not. It's fairly well known that to post images of people in questionable situations, you get it in writing. It's EASY to do if she's down with it. If she wont'give permission in writing,then don't post it. SIMPLE. Guys like you, you can see a woman in the middle of being murdered and think the guy must be an innocent bystander asked by the rotten woman to stab her please, and to call the cops will probably "get an innocent guy in trouble." What a waste of humanity.
Common Sense October 03, 2013 at 08:19 PM
Patrick Perotti, for some reason your simple and common sense words are too sophisticated for most people these days. People make mistakes. It's not permission to vilify them and permanently ruin them.
FSHNT21 October 03, 2013 at 08:37 PM
Here's an idea... There is no other State in the country as screwed up as California. Why don't we just give California back to Mexico ? They already have half the population of the state, they wouldn't have to smuggle their dope and they could keep Nancy Pelosi as a bonus. The U.S. would lose a HUGE drain on it's resources and the Hollywood types would have all sorts of causes they could contribute to and the liberals there could write all the crazy laws they want.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something